The Necessity of Special Creation

I have been educated that the genealogy in Luke is for the Mary's father line all the time, and I have taken it for granted all the time too.

But if the Mary's genealogy is so important while the Joseph's genealogy was just for formal and for outward representation, then why doesn't it mention the name of Mary at all? That is my question.

In Matthew, the genealogy of Joseph mentions the name of Mary even if it is not the genealogy of her family. Then why is her name omitted even in her own family name?

Moreover, if you read the Greek texts, you can find the direct linkage between Joseph and Eli, and Joseph's name is mentioned in the genealogy.
It can be Joseph's mother side genealogy too because only the name of Jospeh is mentioned there. There is no evidence that it is the Mary's genealogy, though Roman Catholic may have been able to fabricate a nice story about Mary.

 

Where is such proof that Heli was the father of Mary?

 

Before this may be closed, I want to point out Hebrews 10: 5

Ζωμα δε κατηρτισω μοι

A Body has thou prepared for me.

We must remember that Jesus was talking about His own body, and that Body cannot be a sperm or an ovum but the flesh.

He was still conscious and understood what He was going to take. If He became a sperm and was supposed to be fertilized with the egg of Mary, then He must have lost the brain, but should have remained as a sperm!

This implies Jesus started from the perfect Human Embryo as well. ( As emphasized by SFIC)

 

If you read the Greek original text, it is like this:

Jesus huios Joseph tou Heli tou Matthat tou Melki tou Ianna tou Joseph tou....... Nathan tou Dabid....Sheth tou Adam

Was David the Father-in-Law of Nathan? NOPE! That same tou is used for the relationship between Joseph and Heli.

Why is the name of Mary omitted there if the genealogy is her family's, since Matthew recorded her name even if it is not her genealogy?

 

HP: First, although women are mentioned, it is in relationship to the men they were married to or had relationship with. It is almost as if their names were mentioned so as not to confuse the man with another man with the same basic name but with another spouse. Read it carefully. If you find that it is not so according to your findings, just give us the reference and your remarks and we can look at it together.

Scripture states that Joseph WAS the father of Jesus, but did not impregnate Mary. Scripture does foretell and prophesy that Christ was to come from the lineage of Abraham just as the genealogies state and through Joseph, not Mary. If you are looking to Mary, you are looking in a place Scripture in no wise directs you to look, in spite of orthodoxy false traditions and teachings.

Where does it ever state that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus? Because the implantation was of the Holy Spirit does not necessitate it not being Joseph’s physical seed, does it? Exercise the loins of your mind. What would stop God from taking Joseph’s seed, or recreating it with matching DNA and implanting it in the womb of Mary. That is no stretch for my mind and stops a lot of unfounded speculation concerning Mary and fulfills prophesy to a tee without lying to the Jews.

The whole problem surrounds the Augustinian notion of original sin (OS). Remove that false notion and the problems so many seem bent on removing with their theories become mute. Jesus can be the man Scripture states He is with a nature Scripture says He has, and originate, as far as His human flesh is concerned, from exactly where Scripture states it did, from Abraham, through David to Joseph His earthly father.

The false Augustinian dogma of original sin places sin in the physical constitution of man, when it really lies not in the propensities of the sensibilities, but rather in the will of man, the chooser of man.

 

If He had a brain at that time when He came into this world, then He didn't have to be fertilized ! Being fertilized with the Ovum of Mary could have meant a new creature and another brain !

 

Yes, I don't rule out the possiblity of God's using the dust again, but not the sinful flesh of Mary. If the body of Mary was used, it could have been used as a kind of dust, and in that case Mary's Genes were not used.
However, the Bible clearly states that Word ( Invisible Truth) became Flesh ( of Jesus ) without mentioning any mediate stage.

Can God change the Satan to be a nice angel?

God's Truth is that eggs are designed to be fertilized with sperms. In order for the ovums to be used, there should be a counter-part, Sperm - this is the truth set up by God.

God can make a new Adam from the dust ( soil) but in that case the eggs of Mary must have become the dusts first and then the dust will be formed in human forms.

However, in case of Jesus coming into the world, God converted the Word into the Flesh directly. This is not impossible because God showed up in flesh many times during OT times, to Abraham, Jacob, to Manoa, etc. The Only thing that He had to do more for Jesus was that He must come out of Mary. Mary served Jesus as His surrogate Mother for her own Creator.

 

Either the genealogy of Mary's family

or Genealogy of JOseph's mother's family

We don't know it very sure.
But one thing clear is that the name of Mary is not mentioned in the plausible genealogy. If she is important, why is the Word of God omitting her name there?

 

HP: Certainly we desire to stay biblical here. What if we said it was the seed of Abraham? Would that make it more palatable to your mind?

 

Just thought I would ask.:saint:

 

I want to ask you one question:

When you reason that the Ovum could be changed to Human Embryo, it must be fertilized with a sperm, then the only process that you can imagine is that Word became a Sperm first, then it was fertilized with the Egg of Mary. In this case the new person generated between Holy Spirit and Mary may be different from the Pre-Incarnate Jesus who worked and created the whole world.

How can you organize between 2 persons? Old Jesus and New Jesus?

These days Life Science may be working in this way:
Egg of a woman can be fertilized with a skin cell. In this case Egg of a woman has 23 chromosomes and need another 23 chromosomes and therefore they may get it from the skin cells because skin cells have already 46 chromosomes, and this may be a kind of human cloning. I believe this will deteriorate the quality or personality of the next generation.

Moreover God prohibited this:

Leviticus 19
19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

Deut 22
9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.


If you think that Egg of a Woman can be fertilized with the Sperm of Holy Spirit, I believe, it is prohibited by God Himself.

God would not do what He prohibited humans beings from doing, unless He has own good reasons such as Judgment and Revenge etc.

 

Also, another important aspect of the Biological Motherhood is that

1) It is an Adultery if the egg of Mary was fertilized with Holy Spirit.

2) It is the violation of God's own Law that the Seed sowing should not be done by mixing or mingling the seeds between 2 different types.

3) It doesnt explain how 2 persons could exist inside one person Jesus, One person who saw Abraham and wrestled with Jacob and the new person created by Holy Spirit and the egg of Mary.

4) It doesn't explain how the sinful nature of Mary could be purified or avoided.

Such theory of Biological Motherhood could be tolerated during the Dark Ages and used for Exalting Mary as goddess or Mother of God.

 

I found the Tou is used in Blue Letter Bible.

Try to read it once again here:

Luke 3:23

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Luk&chapter=3&verse=23&version=KJV#23


Luke 3:24

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Luk&chapter=3&verse=24&version=KJV#24